Why is it that when talking about stats for D-men or grinders, people often portray penalty minutes as a good thing? I understand the value of gritty and tough players on your hockey team and that taking a penalty may occasionally be necessary, but outside of the five minutes assessed for a fight, it’s pretty rare for me to think: “Awesome. Avalanche Player X is in the box for two minutes.”

— Raphael, Milwaukee

Raphael – Good point. I’ve noticed that as well, and it’s not always for D-men. Last I checked, being short-handed for a team wasn’t such a great thing, but a lot of hockey people love to say stuff like “… And he had 250 penalty minutes, too!” when touting the benefits of a player.

Of course, most players who get PIMs that high are fighters, who take an opponent with them to the penalty box, evening things up. It’s a weird thing, though, because a lot of hockey people don’t mind it when a guy puts his team down two minutes — usually depending on the situation in a game. Some like it, actually, when they go on the PK and kill an opposing PP, because killing a power play very often provides a big energy boost to a team — and has the opposite effect on the other.

Some penalties are good penalties — the D-man who prevents the sure breakaway with a last-second trip or hook, for instance. But the fact is, I’d rather not be short-handed if I’m a coach of a team, thank you very much. And anybody who gets over 100 PIMs without many fighting majors is something of a warning siren on that player.

Greetings from Ecuador. I want to ask you about the altitude factor. I live in Quito, a near two miles over the sea. The most important sport here is soccer — and teams like Brazil or Argentina have hated to play here. They are afraid to play over a half-mile of altitude. They play bad and lose games. In American sports, it’s rare to read a comment about the importance of the altitude. Would you give us a comment about this?

— Patricio Cordoba, Quito, Ecuador

Patricio – Glad to hear from you. I’m always amazed at some of the locales that chime in here.

About the altitude: it’s a factor, but not as big as many people think. I actually spent a great deal of time on this issue, in a book I wrote about the Colorado Rockies (the baseball team, not the old hockey team). The fact is, the altitude has very little effect on short-term performance by well-conditioned athletes. It’s important to make those two distinctions: “short term” and “well conditioned.”

It is a fact that there is 17 percent less oxygen in the Denver altitude than that at sea level. At a higher altitude, there
is less atmospheric pressure — and oxygen molecules get further spaced apart. But if you’re a well-conditioned athlete, you already have the capacity to deal with a short-term difference like that. The altitude really comes into play for truly high-stress, aerobic activities over a long period of time — say a marathon. That’s why elite runners who
compete in Colorado always get here a few days in advance to better deal with the altitude. But in short-term, anaerobic activities — and taking 45-second shifts in a hockey game qualifies as anaerobic — the altitude factor really is negligible.

Staying hydrated is important in higher altitudes, so maybe that’s why you seem to see teams going to their water bottles a little more during games in Denver. But no matter what, the altitude is always a convenient excuse for some visiting teams. “The altitude got to us” has been used many times in the past, and will be used many times in the future.

A.D. – Do you think that David Jones has a chance to play a couple of games when the Avs’ regular season is coming to an end?

— Michael K., Denver

Michael – I don’t think so, no. He is only doing minor skating on his own right now, and only 11 games remain in the regular season. There are too many hurdles and checkpoints he has to pass before he can get into a game, and I think that’s going to take longer than the three weeks or so left in the season.

Adrian – The Avs play eight of their last 11 against teams ahead of them in the standings. Tough stretch but also a big opportunity. How many more games do the Avs need to win to get in the playoffs?

— Craig, Washington

Craig – As of Sunday afternoon, with Calgary having lost today to Minnesota, I believe the Avs have to win a minimum of five games in the remaining 12 to make it. Five wins would mean 10 more points, which put them up 15 points on Calgary, the ninth-place team. Calgary has 10 games left, a maximum of 20 points to gain. The Flames would need to win eight of those 10 games to beat out an Avs team that goes only 5-7 down the stretch. So, the odds remain in the Avs’ favor to make it. But am I overconfident they’ll make it? Nope.

Adrian – Could you explain how faceoff wins are determined? Is it won by the team that eventually gains control of the puck? First to touch it? I have seen many times a faceoff is clearly won by one team only to have the other team gain control. Please don’t tell me it is determined by the home team’s “official scorekeeper”!

— Rick, Tulsa, Okla.

Rick – Um, yeah, it is. Different NHL officials in each NHL city make determinations during a game on things like faceoffs, hits, giveaways, etc. Generally, the rule is, if the puck goes anywhere behind the centerman after a faceoff, that centerman “won” the draw.

But the fact is, there are gray areas. Maybe a centerman put the puck behind him slightly, but the opposing wingman got to the puck first and quickly put it back to his own D-men, thereby giving the win to his own guy? And sometimes, centermen intentionally “lose” a draw, especially if the puck is in the opposing zone and he thinks his team can get a good forecheck deep in the corner, etc.

I think there is little homerism among the NHL statkeepers. If there is clear and convincing proof that they are being homers — and that’s pretty easy to prove with every second of a game being on tape now — then they would know they’d be out of a job. And they have more integrity than that besides.

What’s the free-agency status on Chris Stewart after this season? Is Craig Anderson locked in for another year after this season?

— Don Kainer, Longmont

Don – Anderson has another year left on his deal, his two-year deal he signed last summer. I think it’s a safe bet the Avs will sign him to an extension to the current deal after this season (the Avs are barred from doing that in the first year of the deal).

Stewart can be a restricted free agent this summer. He’s in the last year of a deal making $850,000 this year. Don’t worry, he won’t be going anywhere. Even if a team made a big offer sheet to Stewart — and teams are pretty hesitant in doing that, given all the draft picks they have to surrender — I think the Avs would certainly do what’s necessary to keep him.

A.D. – Love reading your insight on All Things Avs. I have a few questions/comments regarding Brandon Yip. Watched the Blues game the other night, and noticed he wasn’t in the lineup. Was he benched/sent back to Erie for Milan Hejduk? Follow-up Q: Yip strikes me as a pure goal scorer, a sniper if you will. Would you agree? Do you see a permanent spot for him on the roster at some point soon?

— Eric Mielke, Littleton

Eric – Yip suffered a separated shoulder earlier this month. Oh, and the Beatles broke up, too! Yes, I think Yip will be a key guy with the Avs for many more years. And the Avs are missing him a lot right now, too.

I have noticed the Avs seem to back off in the third. Recently against Vancouver, before the tying goal, I noticed the Avs were dumping the puck into the offensive zone and making line changes that were only 18- to 30-second shifts. It seems this does not help offense?

— Brendon, Casper, Wyo.

Brendon – You’re preaching to the choir on the whole “sit back” issue. Teams simply feel it’s better to dump the puck in and force the other team to go 200 feet to beat them and run out the clock than it is to keep taking “chances” offensively. I don’t agree with it, but that’s been the way of the game for a long time now. I am one of those guys who believes the only thing the “prevent” defense does is prevent an easy win.

What’s up with Brett Clark? I find it hard to believe that he’s either not injured or in the doghouse for something as he’s been a healthy scratch the past few games. He’s one of the team’s best shot blockers and chews up a lot of ice time. Is there something going on with him?

— Marc, Dallas

Marc – I like Clark and think he’s done a lot of great things for this team, but on a team with eight D-men on the roster, somebody has to be the odd man out sometimes, and Clark has taken his turn on the sidelines. But so have other guys. He’s getting up there in years, and has never been the fastest guy in the game to begin with, or the most physical.

I think he’s still effective in spot situations and is a great guy to have around depth-wise. But you can say that about just about every other D-man on the team.

More in Sports

Over the course of the pursuit of a prep wrestling championship four-peat, there always seems to be a defining match or two that either makes or breaks the chance at joining the most exclusive club in the sport.